Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

Slayer-Fan123 781960 10616247 wrote:
That's comparing a troop choice to an elite choice, for one.

Two, they CLEARLY have different functions for being in different armies. You can't say the same for most of the "unqiue" stuff the Angels have.

I am almost 100% certain that dudes with stormbolters and mixed squads can be taken as troops by DW, and GK strikes and GK termintors are both troop options.

Well I'm certainly all for folding Deathwatch, Grey Knights, and Sisters into the same Inquisition book as none of those armies are exactly swimming in LOTS OF OPTIONS THEY NEED A CODEX!!!!1!

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:
Well I'm certainly all for folding Deathwatch, Grey Knights, and Sisters into the same Inquisition book as none of those armies are exactly swimming in LOTS OF OPTIONS THEY NEED A CODEX!!!!1!

They are entirely mismatched as factions however, with nothing in common save for a connection to the inquisition.

The more logical consolidation would be -
Deathwatch into marines - because they share just about everything already
Sisters and Inquisition - because the sisters already have several of the remnant inquisition units and the best thematic link
Grey Knights into Talons of the Emperor - because it gives them a chance to stand out as shadowy psykers, rather than silver ultramarines

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:
Well I'm certainly all for folding Deathwatch, Grey Knights, and Sisters into the same Inquisition book as none of those armies are exactly swimming in LOTS OF OPTIONS THEY NEED A CODEX!!!!1!

then why can't those options be developed. All GW has to do is write the rules down. If they wanted to they could make 4-5 unit types out of a single box, and that is not counting possible characters. The GK termintor box already builds termintors, paladins, any of the termintor armoured GK characters, the terminator ancient , the apothecary and the champion. the problem is not the fact that the options aren't there or that the models don't exist. It is jus that GW wrote them bad. When the only difference between a purgation squad and a strike squad, is the fact one can take more hvy weapons, which are so bad you don't want to take them anyway, then there is a problem. But it ain't a problem of lack of varity.

DW toolbox squads are also very intersting, a termintor and an aggressor along side 5 veterans and sniper intercessor will work different then 8 dudes with stormbolters and stormshields.

Grey Knights into Talons of the Emperor - because it gives them a chance to stand out as shadowy psykers, rather than silver ultramarines

but they are not silver ultramarines. ultramarines are cheap and have efficient rules and gear. But lets say they are in a codex with SoS and custodes. Why would anyone ever take a unit of GK termintors, when the same codex has dawnjetbike captins and custodes? Why take a GK banner guy, when the custodes guy gives +4inv to everyone around.? GK cost so much that they out price custodes for less efficiency, and lower stats. They may as well be phased out then, because playing an army of them would be just as bad as it is now. Assuming of course they would keep the options they have right now.

Jimbobbyish wrote:
I wouldn't mind having a SW supplement codex, Only change I would want are different Combat Doctrines and more werewolves!

Uhh gods shoot me now - More Wolfy Wolfyness????

 Mr Morden wrote:

Jimbobbyish wrote:
I wouldn't mind having a SW supplement codex, Only change I would want are different Combat Doctrines and more werewolves!

Uhh gods shoot me now - More Wolfy Wolfyness????

play some other marines then, plenty of options.

That's because it is strawmanning.

He also either doesn't play chaos, or is advocating piracy of GW books.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:
Well I'm certainly all for folding Deathwatch, Grey Knights, and Sisters into the same Inquisition book as none of those armies are exactly swimming in LOTS OF OPTIONS THEY NEED A CODEX!!!!1!

Nevermind the fact that none of the four share any units in common?

Lets face it, you don't want consolidation of your army, you just want forced consolidation.

 Mmmpi wrote:

Spoiler:

 Sgt_Smudge wrote:

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:

 Sgt_Smudge wrote:

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:Because fluffbunnies will hiss at the very thought of consolidation and GW knows it can milk them for money.

Slayer-Fan123, whilst I would actually also like to see BA/DA/SW given supplement treatment, you also know that I'm probably the fluffiest bunny here.

It's not a "fluffbunny" thing, and relying on that as some kind of crutch weakens the argument (which I, a fluffbunny, agree with).

They're the ones buying those codices instead of saying "no" go GW's crummy practice though, and end up justifying it through bizarre mental gymnastics. It's also why I refuse to ever buy a CSM codex ever again now until they're made to represent Legions proper instead of those garbage we have now, and why I've been encouraging everyone I know to refuse to give money for the garbage Chaos Knights release.

No, the people who want those codexes are the ones buying them. Not some sort of bizarre "you like the lore of the game, hah!" argument that you seem to be pedalling.

In case you conveniently forgot, you know I'm what you'd call a "fluffbunny" - power level and all. I think that DA/BA/SW should be folded in. Therefore, something about your usage of "fluffbunny" is very much misguided, and not appropriate for this discussion.

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:

Bharring wrote:
It's not always the narrative players (less pejorative term for "fluffbunny"). A narrative player can play UltraMarines reasonably without picking up the supplement. A competitive player cannot. Add to it that competitive players are more fixated on knowing everyone else's rules, and "buying those codices instead of saying "no" go GW's crummy practice" is certainly not just a "narrative player" problem.

No, because the fluffbunny wants the Characters and everything too. I refuse to buy the Supplements too if you catch my drift.

That sounds like a lot of strawmanning. If you can't make your argument without relying on this mythical "fluffbunny" (of which I am one, and do not fit your extremely narrow viewpoint), it's not exactly a solid one.

Again, I support the idea of consolidating books. But your argument for it is doing no favours.

That's because it is strawmanning.

He also either doesn't play chaos, or is advocating piracy of GW books.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:
Well I'm certainly all for folding Deathwatch, Grey Knights, and Sisters into the same Inquisition book as none of those armies are exactly swimming in LOTS OF OPTIONS THEY NEED A CODEX!!!!1!

Nevermind the fact that none of the four share any units in common?

Lets face it, you don't want consolidation of your army, you just want forced consolidation.

I've played Deathwatch and Death Guard. Wanna try that again?

Karol wrote:
Why would anyone ever take a unit of GK termintors, when the same codex has dawnjetbike captins and custodes?

This is already the way things are with allies.

Sharing a codex means that two factions that can't really afford to pad out detachments inefficiently can more easily work together. The custodes lack a psychic presence, tactical teleportation, shooting through walls, etc - they want to be in close while GK can be a little more stand-off, particularly if GW backs off the ten marines in a rhino theme they got in 5th and moves back towards the shrouded psykers of 3rd.

And the talons are a small codex with plenty of room for expansion and lots of missing pieces. By the OP as an SM supplement the GK would just be further watered down to fit.

Karol wrote:

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:
Well I'm certainly all for folding Deathwatch, Grey Knights, and Sisters into the same Inquisition book as none of those armies are exactly swimming in LOTS OF OPTIONS THEY NEED A CODEX!!!!1!

then why can't those options be developed. All GW has to do is write the rules down. If they wanted to they could make 4-5 unit types out of a single box, and that is not counting possible characters. The GK termintor box already builds termintors, paladins, any of the termintor armoured GK characters, the terminator ancient , the apothecary and the champion. the problem is not the fact that the options aren't there or that the models don't exist. It is jus that GW wrote them bad. When the only difference between a purgation squad and a strike squad, is the fact one can take more hvy weapons, which are so bad you don't want to take them anyway, then there is a problem. But it ain't a problem of lack of varity.

DW toolbox squads are also very intersting, a termintor and an aggressor along side 5 veterans and sniper intercessor will work different then 8 dudes with stormbolters and stormshields.

Grey Knights into Talons of the Emperor - because it gives them a chance to stand out as shadowy psykers, rather than silver ultramarines

but they are not silver ultramarines. ultramarines are cheap and have efficient rules and gear. But lets say they are in a codex with SoS and custodes. Why would anyone ever take a unit of GK termintors, when the same codex has dawnjetbike captins and custodes? Why take a GK banner guy, when the custodes guy gives +4inv to everyone around.? GK cost so much that they out price custodes for less efficiency, and lower stats. They may as well be phased out then, because playing an army of them would be just as bad as it is now. Assuming of course they would keep the options they have right now.

Inquistion rules drop in November WD; I suspect they will be more like the WD Ynnari Dex than the October SoS dex, meaning they will actually get relics, strats, a psychic discipline, wl traits. They'll be able to join any Imperial detachment without breaking it, but they will also have the capacity to take command of detachments that include only their respective chambers militant, thereby granting access to a Inquisition traits and auras. There's also an Inquisition model release in November, though I suspect it's just a repackage of the old metal hereticus crew.

The Inquisition rule set will be the last of the Imperial Agents with current, printed rules 40k. This leads me to believe that by next summer, we'll see all of these Indexes collected and perhaps somewhat tweaked and re-released as Codex: Imperial Agents. For any of you who haven't seen the Imperial Agents data sheets, the Imperial Agents dex should bring together Assassins, Sisters of Silence, the Inquisition and the warbands of the three Rogue Traders [Nyem Shai Murad, Janus Drake and Elucia Vhane's Euclidean Starstriders- the only group to have been given a name].

The Inquisitors will be designed to synergize with their chambers militant, and I think this might give GK one source for a boost, and new content via Pychic Awakening will give them another perk. I don't know if what they get can or will adress any of their issues, but it will be something. I'm not sure that the November PA is going to be the one where they get their content. We suspect, however, that there will be sisters content, which will be in addition to the sisters dex. It drops on the 23rd, but if's looking like you have to buy the box to get it.

All things considered, it's not exactly a good time to be commenting about how limited those ranges are. Even die hard sisters players who have been following the bulletins for MONTHS still don't know what they'll do with acts of faith and order traits. One thing that we saw in the beta dex was that many of the order traits, wl traits, relics and strats augmented the way AoF worked; most people liked or at least didn't mind that part- the problem was that AoF were weak and that many required a roll, despite requiring the expenditure of a finite resource This makes them unsuitable to share a dex with anyone- except the Ecclesiarchy and the Hereticus, with whom they share a long and well established history.

Karol wrote:Why would anyone ever take a unit of GK termintors, when the same codex has dawnjetbike captins and custodes? Why take a GK banner guy, when the custodes guy gives +4inv to everyone around.? GK cost so much that they out price custodes for less efficiency, and lower stats. They may as well be phased out then, because playing an army of them would be just as bad as it is now. Assuming of course they would keep the options they have right now.

Because Grey Knight Terminators look different to Custodes, have psychic powers, and because someone might simply prefer GK for some flavour or aesthetic reason. Because as I hate to belabour the point, but there's more to 40k than winning and playing to win. If you can find a way to have fun with whatever units you like, then go ahead and have fun with them.

I don't have any Custodes, but I do have a small Grey Knights force. Why? Because I think they're cool, and I don't need them to win games to validate that.

But of course, YMMV.

[/spoiler]

Nope. Apparently I got it in one.

Well you said I don't play an army that needs consolidation and I told you otherwise. So what's the argument you're making?

Oh wait you never had one.

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:
Well you said I don't play an army that needs consolidation and I told you otherwise. So what's the argument you're making?

Funny, none of those armies are BA/DA/or SW.

Also, my 2nd guess about you being a chaos player was also right. You're advocating piracy.

I would support supplement-zation of falvor marines in a heartbeat.

Jimbobbyish wrote:

 Mr Morden wrote:

Jimbobbyish wrote:
I wouldn't mind having a SW supplement codex, Only change I would want are different Combat Doctrines and more werewolves!

Uhh gods shoot me now - More Wolfy Wolfyness????

play some other marines then, plenty of options.

I do - I have several Marine armies - does not mean I have to like the Wolfy Wolf gak does it.

DA, BA and SW can stand alone as factions with their own Codexes (Codices?) as they have enough differentiation in models/aesthetic, lore, units and playstyle without consuming too much in the way of GW resources. Their lore is long-established with enough folks that care about it to sustain sales. At the end of the day factions that give a good return on their investment to GW will survive/grow and those that don't will decline/vanish. I am sure that the suits at GW look at sales figures for Dark Angels books and models over the last two decades when they are making decisions. New factions represent risk in terms of resources. DA, BA, SW are much less of a risk.

Now, could the Dark Angels receive a Supplement instead of a Codex? Well, I suppose, but it would be a rather huge supplement unless we are cutting something. There are units from the main SM Codex that the DA do not have access to. This is part of what makes them different - see my first line. Dark Angels players get their own unique units in exchange. Whether its worth it is an individual player's choice and nobody else's. They have plenty of unique units and stratagems. They have lots of distinct, established lore. Then I have to buy two books. With the current construct I only have to buy my one DA Codex. I'm good with that.

I get that some here do not like those factions. You don't have to buy them. That's what I don't understand about some of the rather vehement emotion here. Don't like Space Wolves? Don't buy them. I don't see how they are hurting you or the hobby.

TangoTwoBravo wrote:
DA, BA and SW can stand alone as factions with their own Codexes (Codices?) as they have enough differentiation in models/aesthetic, lore, units and playstyle without consuming too much in the way of GW resources. Their lore is long-established with enough folks that care about it to sustain sales. At the end of the day factions that give a good return on their investment to GW will survive/grow and those that don't will decline/vanish. I am sure that the suits at GW look at sales figures for Dark Angels books and models over the last two decades when they are making decisions. New factions represent risk in terms of resources. DA, BA, SW are much less of a risk.

Now, could the Dark Angels receive a Supplement instead of a Codex? Well, I suppose, but it would be a rather huge supplement unless we are cutting something. There are units from the main SM Codex that the DA do not have access to. This is part of what makes them different - see my first line. Dark Angels players get their own unique units in exchange. Whether its worth it is an individual player's choice and nobody else's. They have plenty of unique units and stratagems. They have lots of distinct, established lore. Then I have to buy two books. With the current construct I only have to buy my one DA Codex. I'm good with that.

I get that some here do not like those factions. You don't have to buy them. That's what I don't understand about some of the rather vehement emotion here. Don't like Space Wolves? Don't buy them. I don't see how they are hurting you or the hobby.

Because the narrow focuss on the Marine subfaction and then even narrower focus on a few Marine sub-sub factions removes huge amounts of focus, effort and resources from....anything else - thats why. Why am I restricted in just adding to my Wolves or Angels armies and not other factions

Also because of the pretend unqiue units - yeah we have a different gun, or we can have chainswords - the vanilla unit has to be worse and the hundreds of other Chapters that would use these options can't.

As always if you push one product ALL the time, give it new rules, own codexes, slightly different rules to pretend the units are actually different then shock horrror they might just maybe sell.....

Lastly the sheet awfulness of the last decades lore and models for the Angels and Wolves is sad.

 Mmmpi wrote:

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:
Well you said I don't play an army that needs consolidation and I told you otherwise. So what's the argument you're making?

Funny, none of those armies are BA/DA/or SW.

Also, my 2nd guess about you being a chaos player was also right. You're advocating piracy.

I had Space Wolves last edition.

Also it doesn't matter if I don't play those particular two armies, because I'm still advocating consolidation for armies I play too, so there isn't some hypocrisy like you're trying to find for a "gotcha" moment, which you haven't had any luck with.

Also what's your point? I'm saying don't give GW money for products they don't deserve money for. That includes the CSM codex and the Legions, the Angels, Grey Knights + Deathwatch, and the ongoing Supplements. However you want to acquire the rules is none of my business. Perhaps borrow a friend's copy...

" I had Space Wolves last edition. "
Do you want a cookie?

" Also it doesn't matter if I don't play those particular two armies, because I'm still advocating consolidation for armies I play too, so there isn't some hypocrisy like you're trying to find for a "gotcha" moment, which you haven't had any luck with. "

The bigger issue is that everything you're trying to pass of as fact is completely subjective.




Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Mr Morden wrote:

TangoTwoBravo wrote:
DA, BA and SW can stand alone as factions with their own Codexes (Codices?) as they have enough differentiation in models/aesthetic, lore, units and playstyle without consuming too much in the way of GW resources. Their lore is long-established with enough folks that care about it to sustain sales. At the end of the day factions that give a good return on their investment to GW will survive/grow and those that don't will decline/vanish. I am sure that the suits at GW look at sales figures for Dark Angels books and models over the last two decades when they are making decisions. New factions represent risk in terms of resources. DA, BA, SW are much less of a risk.

Now, could the Dark Angels receive a Supplement instead of a Codex? Well, I suppose, but it would be a rather huge supplement unless we are cutting something. There are units from the main SM Codex that the DA do not have access to. This is part of what makes them different - see my first line. Dark Angels players get their own unique units in exchange. Whether its worth it is an individual player's choice and nobody else's. They have plenty of unique units and stratagems. They have lots of distinct, established lore. Then I have to buy two books. With the current construct I only have to buy my one DA Codex. I'm good with that.

I get that some here do not like those factions. You don't have to buy them. That's what I don't understand about some of the rather vehement emotion here. Don't like Space Wolves? Don't buy them. I don't see how they are hurting you or the hobby.

Because the narrow focuss on the Marine subfaction and then even narrower focus on a few Marine sub-sub factions removes huge amounts of focus, effort and resources from....anything else - thats why. Why am I restricted in just adding to my Wolves or Angels armies and not other factions

Also because of the pretend unqiue units - yeah we have a different gun, or we can have chainswords - the vanilla unit has to be worse and the hundreds of other Chapters that would use these options can't.

As always if you push one product ALL the time, give it new rules, own codexes, slightly different rules to pretend the units are actually different then shock horrror they might just maybe sell.....

Lastly the sheet awfulness of the last decades lore and models for the Angels and Wolves is sad.

Saying that the unique units aren't unique enough is like saying eldar guardians are IG with a different gun.

I think the "we got unique units so we need a separate Codex" argument is a bit faulty. Just looking at my own Ork Codex, I found 6 units that are "Kultur locked", meaning they can only be used with a single sub-Faction. Two of these can technically be used in other Kulturs, mind you, but they have a special rule for that and don't benefit from the sub-Faction bonuses when added to them.

Anyway, point is: plenty of Codexes have options that can only be used with certain sub-Factions. Units, Stratagems, and Relics. And they work just fine like this. It's just not a good argument to use "unique units" as a reason for a separate Codex.

 Mmmpi wrote:
" I had Space Wolves last edition. "
Do you want a cookie?

" Also it doesn't matter if I don't play those particular two armies, because I'm still advocating consolidation for armies I play too, so there isn't some hypocrisy like you're trying to find for a "gotcha" moment, which you haven't had any luck with. "

The bigger issue is that everything you're trying to pass of as fact is completely subjective.




Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Mr Morden wrote:

TangoTwoBravo wrote:
DA, BA and SW can stand alone as factions with their own Codexes (Codices?) as they have enough differentiation in models/aesthetic, lore, units and playstyle without consuming too much in the way of GW resources. Their lore is long-established with enough folks that care about it to sustain sales. At the end of the day factions that give a good return on their investment to GW will survive/grow and those that don't will decline/vanish. I am sure that the suits at GW look at sales figures for Dark Angels books and models over the last two decades when they are making decisions. New factions represent risk in terms of resources. DA, BA, SW are much less of a risk.

Now, could the Dark Angels receive a Supplement instead of a Codex? Well, I suppose, but it would be a rather huge supplement unless we are cutting something. There are units from the main SM Codex that the DA do not have access to. This is part of what makes them different - see my first line. Dark Angels players get their own unique units in exchange. Whether its worth it is an individual player's choice and nobody else's. They have plenty of unique units and stratagems. They have lots of distinct, established lore. Then I have to buy two books. With the current construct I only have to buy my one DA Codex. I'm good with that.

I get that some here do not like those factions. You don't have to buy them. That's what I don't understand about some of the rather vehement emotion here. Don't like Space Wolves? Don't buy them. I don't see how they are hurting you or the hobby.

Because the narrow focuss on the Marine subfaction and then even narrower focus on a few Marine sub-sub factions removes huge amounts of focus, effort and resources from....anything else - thats why. Why am I restricted in just adding to my Wolves or Angels armies and not other factions

Also because of the pretend unqiue units - yeah we have a different gun, or we can have chainswords - the vanilla unit has to be worse and the hundreds of other Chapters that would use these options can't.

As always if you push one product ALL the time, give it new rules, own codexes, slightly different rules to pretend the units are actually different then shock horrror they might just maybe sell.....

Lastly the sheet awfulness of the last decades lore and models for the Angels and Wolves is sad.

Saying that the unique units aren't unique enough is like saying eldar guardians are IG with a different gun.

HAHAHAHHAHAHHAA - OH I am sorry where you actaully serious in comparing

Marine unit A with chainsword and Marine Unit B without them to

Human with lasgun to ELDAR with Shuriken catapult

Nah Mate just no. Thats not a strawman thats a STRAWGIANT - on fire - with fireworks

I donlt think we should get something when others don't - maybe thats not you view.

 flandarz wrote:
I think the "we got unique units so we need a separate Codex" argument is a bit faulty. Just looking at my own Ork Codex, I found 6 units that are "Kultur locked", meaning they can only be used with a single sub-Faction. Two of these can technically be used in other Kulturs, mind you, but they have a special rule for that and don't benefit from the sub-Faction bonuses when added to them.

Anyway, point is: plenty of Codexes have options that can only be used with certain sub-Factions. Units, Stratagems, and Relics. And they work just fine like this. It's just not a good argument to use "unique units" as a reason for a separate Codex.

Freebootaz Codex 2020


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Mmmpi wrote:
" I had Space Wolves last edition. "
Do you want a cookie?

" Also it doesn't matter if I don't play those particular two armies, because I'm still advocating consolidation for armies I play too, so there isn't some hypocrisy like you're trying to find for a "gotcha" moment, which you haven't had any luck with. "

The bigger issue is that everything you're trying to pass of as fact is completely subjective.




Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Mr Morden wrote:

TangoTwoBravo wrote:
DA, BA and SW can stand alone as factions with their own Codexes (Codices?) as they have enough differentiation in models/aesthetic, lore, units and playstyle without consuming too much in the way of GW resources. Their lore is long-established with enough folks that care about it to sustain sales. At the end of the day factions that give a good return on their investment to GW will survive/grow and those that don't will decline/vanish. I am sure that the suits at GW look at sales figures for Dark Angels books and models over the last two decades when they are making decisions. New factions represent risk in terms of resources. DA, BA, SW are much less of a risk.

Now, could the Dark Angels receive a Supplement instead of a Codex? Well, I suppose, but it would be a rather huge supplement unless we are cutting something. There are units from the main SM Codex that the DA do not have access to. This is part of what makes them different - see my first line. Dark Angels players get their own unique units in exchange. Whether its worth it is an individual player's choice and nobody else's. They have plenty of unique units and stratagems. They have lots of distinct, established lore. Then I have to buy two books. With the current construct I only have to buy my one DA Codex. I'm good with that.

I get that some here do not like those factions. You don't have to buy them. That's what I don't understand about some of the rather vehement emotion here. Don't like Space Wolves? Don't buy them. I don't see how they are hurting you or the hobby.

Because the narrow focuss on the Marine subfaction and then even narrower focus on a few Marine sub-sub factions removes huge amounts of focus, effort and resources from....anything else - thats why. Why am I restricted in just adding to my Wolves or Angels armies and not other factions

Also because of the pretend unqiue units - yeah we have a different gun, or we can have chainswords - the vanilla unit has to be worse and the hundreds of other Chapters that would use these options can't.

As always if you push one product ALL the time, give it new rules, own codexes, slightly different rules to pretend the units are actually different then shock horrror they might just maybe sell.....

Lastly the sheet awfulness of the last decades lore and models for the Angels and Wolves is sad.

Saying that the unique units aren't unique enough is like saying eldar guardians are IG with a different gun.

It is fact their unique points are hardly that unique. Sanguine Priests hardly get use just like Apothecaries and get the same exact role: heal and bring back dead models once in a blue moon. Nobody uses their S+1 bonus.

So what's the real difference? A different slot (Elite vs HQ). That's really it. You need a whole separate codex you poor thing!

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:
That doesn't make GW correct. GW, in fact, says many things that end up being incorrect.

What's your point at that point? Just listen and be a good customer?

GW makes supplement codexes, and has done for 20 years because people want them.

Thankfully most people disagree with you and we have variety in the game.

Do you think we wouldn't have variety without specific Codexes for certain things? Even if everything got consolidated to the most basic level, you'd still be looking at Imperium, Orkz, Aeldari, Drukhari, Tau, Necrons, Tyranids, and Chaos. That's eight possible Factions, before you even get into sub-Factions and individual unit choices. And, honestly, that's probably too much consolidation, considering the wide range that Imperium and Chaos can field. Better would be: Imperium, Marines, Orkz, Aeldari, Drukhari, Tau, Necrons, Tyranids, Chaos Marines, Daemons, for 10 possible Faction choices before getting to sub-Factions and the like. That might be too much there too, but, in my opinion, it'd be substantially simpler to balance and manage the number of Codexes we got now. I don't have a hard number off the top of my head, but it HAS to be close to 20 or more, right?

It probably is more than 20 codexes alright, which isn't a bad thing. 40k is a hobby first and foremost, and giving hobbyists options is good.

Most people that play Imperial Fists, Salamanders, Iron Hands, Ultramarines, Whitescars or Raven Guard are happy to have supplements.

We already see threads wishlisting the same for other factions.

I agree that options are good. I mentioned earlier that, ideally, the game would have tons of options AND well-written and balanced rules. But I'd rather have good rules than options, if I had to choose one or the other.

For me, I'd rather not have the Stompa and Mek Workshop as options than to have them with the rules they have now. The Workshop is particular is so bad that even if it were free, no one would field it. And the Stompa is so poorly priced that it isn't even viable in a casual match-up vs an "anti-infantry" list. Rather than tease me with these models that I can't use in the game, I'd have preferred not to have them at all. But that might just be me.

 Sentineil wrote:
It probably is more than 20 codexes alright, which isn't a bad thing. 40k is a hobby first and foremost, and giving hobbyists options is good.

Most people that play Imperial Fists, Salamanders, Iron Hands, Ultramarines, Whitescars or Raven Guard are happy to have supplements.

We already see threads wishlisting the same for other factions.

Options come from the models themselves not the rules.

Black Templar players had a standalone codex for one edition and haven't shut up about being hard-done-to since.

I don't know if the forums could take it from another three Marine playerbases.

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:

 Sentineil wrote:
It probably is more than 20 codexes alright, which isn't a bad thing. 40k is a hobby first and foremost, and giving hobbyists options is good.

Most people that play Imperial Fists, Salamanders, Iron Hands, Ultramarines, Whitescars or Raven Guard are happy to have supplements.

We already see threads wishlisting the same for other factions.

Options come from the models themselves not the rules.

So Armory was models not rules?

Arbitrator wrote:Black Templar players had a standalone codex for one edition and haven't shut up about being hard-done-to since.

I don't know if the forums could take it from another three Marine playerbases.

No reason for Black Templars to shut up... and they are an example why some ideas are bad ideas...